• The Cycling News forum is still looking to add volunteer moderators with. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Katusha Anti-doping

Mar 10, 2009
6,158
1
0
Visit site
I read it as being they're anti-getting-caught.

The real teams that are anti-doping will provide an avenue for the rider to get clean and get on the straight and narrow. Not outcast them to be on the dole with no job and less money than they started out with. I'm thinking the Anti-Doping teams/people need to really think about what they're saying before they write it up and post it. The teams just want to distance themselves from any backlash for fear of loss of sponsors, which leads me to believe they know exactly what is going on.
 
Mar 18, 2009
2,442
0
0
Visit site
Robbie McEwen, with Paolo Bettini, also refused to sign the UCI charter on doping because of the financial punishment clause. Robbie has stated that he has no problems with the rest of the charter, and presumably Katusha's efforts as well, but he is concerned that riders will be falsely accused and suffer more than losing out financially. Look at the litany of riders implicated in Operation Puerto that are now no longer riding professionally, yet these riders were not tried or found guilty. It is not fair to the riders either to lose their livelihood and profession on unsubstantiated rumours.

While I understand the Katusha are just protecting themselves from being brought into disrepute if their cyclists are found positive, I also doubt that any guilty rider has had to financially compensate the UCI after being found guilty of doping. It doesn't seem too legally binding.
 
I'd even be so bold to say many teams that have "anti-doping" programs test their athletes so the athletes won't get caught at doping controls, and cost the team humiliation, embarrassment, money, etc. Not so the athletes don't dope.

A team that's really anti-doping would not only implement serious profiling of not only HCT, but hematology testing of blood volume, plus power outputs. They would also have an honor code of some sort, and respect whistleblowers and such programs. Working with athletes to reward them for coming clean. Plus supporting following up on the athletes confessions. As it is now, riders that confess are treated far worse by the UCI, teams, other riders, and even many fans, than those that those that unrepentantly dope with no limitations, and no remorse. Read this article about a familiar name if you aren't sure.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Alpe d'Huez said:
I'd even be so bold to say many teams that have "anti-doping" programs test their athletes so the athletes won't get caught at doping controls, and cost the team humiliation, embarrassment, money, etc. Not so the athletes don't dope.

A team that's really anti-doping would not only implement serious profiling of not only HCT, but hematology testing of blood volume, plus power outputs. They would also have an honor code of some sort, and respect whistleblowers and such programs. Working with athletes to reward them for coming clean. Plus supporting following up on the athletes confessions. As it is now, riders that confess are treated far worse by the UCI, teams, other riders, and even many fans, than those that those that unrepentantly dope with no limitations, and no remorse. Read this article about a familiar name if you aren't sure.

Now that is just cynical*



*"cynical" was recently re-defined by Websters as meaning "true"
 
Mar 10, 2009
6,158
1
0
Visit site
elapid said:
Look at the litany of riders implicated in Operation Puerto that are now no longer riding professionally, yet these riders were not tried or found guilty. It is not fair to the riders either to lose their livelihood and profession on unsubstantiated rumours.

Yet look at the list of riders still racing that were implicated and procecuted and did time. Then the list of those that got off scott free (in my eyes anyway).
 
Thoughtforfood said:
Now that is just cynical*.

I'm wondering if someone will actually come along here and a refute what I'm asserting.

Anyone?

ElChingon said:
Yet look at the list of riders still racing that were implicated and procecuted and did time. Then the list of those that got off scott free (in my eyes anyway).

And those like Koldo Gil who offered his DNA to compare, as no team will sign him. The UCI rejected his offer and he's been blacklisted. Or how about Roberto Heras, who no team will touch, even though he long ago served his suspension and he seems pretty contrite about his past? Or how about the other dozens and dozens of blood bags and names in ledgers still never really looked into?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
ElChingon said:
Yet look at the list of riders still racing that were implicated and procecuted and did time. Then the list of those that got off scott free (in my eyes anyway).

<cough> <cough> Allan Davis <cough>
 
Mar 19, 2009
571
0
0
Visit site
I wouldn't sign a piece of trash like that either. 5 times your salary? What if they don't pay? . . lock them up ? . . . . for a sporting violation? They've gone mad. Mad MAD MADDD!

Will cycling ever be free of drugs? He!! no. Clean up the rest of society, then get back to me on how a "war on drugs" is going !


So, what do they do? Cancel cycling? No .. . too much money to be made.

Let 'em dope openly? No . . . . to much sponsorship money to lose.

Should we make them criminals ?. . . there's always fresh meat coming up the ranks to replace them. We'll make an example out of them and hope the rest don't get caught.


You see. . . there is no great solution. So the madness will continue to get worse. All I can say is .. . . . expect the unexpected. :eek:
 
May 1, 2009
149
0
0
Visit site
This whole scenario is the problem with the 'war' doping. Everything is blamed on the rider. Doping at a professional level isn't just some evil little rider who is too lazy to train, so he scores some EPO from a guy on a street corner and goes and shoots up in a bathroom. This is a highly technical medical system that requires a network of doctors and support staff to do it correctly.

But it in order to look like everyone is going to take doping seriously, they decide to financially ruin some poor guy, who doesn't even have a college degree, who comes from a long line of Belgian house painters, who most of the time has a wife and children. The whole thing is so hypocritocal. I think this sort of attitude is more morally and ethically corrupt than the doping itself!

Why not fine team owners and managers 5x their earnings? Watch doping get stamped out then!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
boalio said:
This whole scenario is the problem with the 'war' doping. Everything is blamed on the rider. Doping at a professional level isn't just some evil little rider who is too lazy to train, so he scores some EPO from a guy on a street corner and goes and shoots up in a bathroom. This is a highly technical medical system that requires a network of doctors and support staff to do it correctly.

But it in order to look like everyone is going to take doping seriously, they decide to financially ruin some poor guy, who doesn't even have a college degree, who comes from a long line of Belgian house painters, who most of the time has a wife and children. The whole thing is so hypocritocal. I think this sort of attitude is more morally and ethically corrupt than the doping itself!

Why not fine team owners and managers 5x their earnings? Watch doping get stamped out then!

You'll hear no argument from me.

Alpe,
From one of your posts, it sounded like you think I disagree with you. I don't.
 
jaylew said:
Wouldn't it be up to you to prove your assertion?
Was mostly just using logic. Take a look at Kohl's confession and how giddy Lotto was with his bio numbers. Or even take a look at the way Damsgaard was basically fired from his old clinic, and now runs his own anti-doping program, taking money directly from the teams he's supposed to be watching over.

Foxes guarding hen houses is what it looks like to me.
boalio said:
Why not fine team owners and managers 5x their earnings? Watch doping get stamped out then!
Great post Boalio. Agree with everything you say.

ThoughtforFood - No, I know you are in completely agreement with me on this issue. I actually feel like we're starting to have an affect on waking people up with these threads. People like you, me, BroDeal, were viewed as total cynics, and people called BigBoat a "troll", and yet, the more evidence is dug up and and revealed, the more compelling our so called cynicism is.
 
Apr 11, 2009
2,250
0
0
Visit site
Alpe d'Huez said:
...and respect whistleblowers and such programs. Working with athletes to reward them for coming clean. Plus supporting following up on the athletes confessions. As it is now, riders that confess are treated far worse by the UCI, teams, other riders, and even many fans, than those that those that unrepentantly dope with no limitations, and no remorse.

Yes, it does seem very odd that there is no whistleblower protection. If one used the economic argument of Hulkgogan on the other thread, it does seem that the structure of incentives in cycling is wonky: it's all about punishment and ruin if you get caught, and huge rewards if you are not caught and are able to win thereby.

Have revised my views about ethics vs. economics of doping. The purely punitive/"ethical" approach will not solve the problem; it probably buries it deeper.

Not for legalization of doping, but leniency and support for whistleblowers. Can't all be on the punitive side of the ledger.
 
boalio said:
This whole scenario is the problem with the 'war' doping. Everything is blamed on the rider. Doping at a professional level isn't just some evil little rider who is too lazy to train, so he scores some EPO from a guy on a street corner and goes and shoots up in a bathroom. This is a highly technical medical system that requires a network of doctors and support staff to do it correctly.

But it in order to look like everyone is going to take doping seriously, they decide to financially ruin some poor guy, who doesn't even have a college degree, who comes from a long line of Belgian house painters, who most of the time has a wife and children. The whole thing is so hypocritocal. I think this sort of attitude is more morally and ethically corrupt than the doping itself!

Why not fine team owners and managers 5x their earnings? Watch doping get stamped out then!

Katusha just put in practice what is a proven formula to correct a bad behavior, like in any judicial system around the world: you commit a crime, you pay for it.
I personally find that the only way to make a cyclist avoid the temptation of seeking doping is to penalize him where it hurts the most: FINANCIALLY -how?
The price for a doping violation is so high that is just unthinkable to even try- therefore the "necessity" & the demand for doping products, dirty doctors, doping rings & any kind of networks or programs will disappear by default. the same penalty most be apply to DS, managers, team owners & any other member of a team to get involved in pursuing any doping activities, or the encouragement of them.
 
Apr 29, 2009
131
0
0
Visit site
Give them all lie-detector tests. "Come join our team". "Strap yourself to this machine and if you pass you get a big fat cheque and a new jersey".
 
Mar 18, 2009
2,442
0
0
Visit site
jaylew said:
Wouldn't it be up to you to prove your assertion?

What about Team Columbia-High Road's Serhiy Honchar? From his Wikipedia site: "On 11 May 2007, Honchar was suspended for 30 days by his T-Mobile team, following blood tests taken at Liège-Bastogne-Liège and the Tour de Romandie. On 19 June 2007, the T-Mobile team announced the termination of his contract."

This seems to prove Alpe's point rather well. Honchar slips quietly away and Team Columbia-High Road are not made to look bad.

ElChingon said:
Yet look at the list of riders still racing that were implicated and procecuted and did time. Then the list of those that got off scott free (in my eyes anyway).

Who was prosecuted? To the best of my knowledge, only Ivan Basso and Jörg Jaksche have been found guilty because of their involvement with Operation Puerto. Both suspensions were a result of confessions, Basso after initially being cleared of any involvement by the RFEC. No one else has been prosecuted based on evidence attained during Operation Puerto. Stay tuned for Valverde, however.

Yes, many riders should have been found guilty if their cases were able to proceed to their national federations. They didn't because of the Spanish judiciary, and hence they should be allowed to ride because their only guilt is by suspicion and rumours, not facts and convictions.

Thoughtforfood said:
<cough> <cough> Allan Davis <cough>

Alan Davis spent a year telling anyone who would listen that he would offer his DNA to prove he was not involved. Like Gil, the UCI would not get off their fat lazy asses and take him up on his offer. He fought for a year and was cleared by the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority. He was one of the lucky ones. If he was truly guilty, then let him face the ASADA and be found guilty. If the evidence is not there or not being released by the Spanish authorities, then he and every other implicated rider has the right to ride, including Contador.

Alpe d'Huez said:
ThoughtforFood - No, I know you are in completely agreement with me on this issue. I actually feel like we're starting to have an affect on waking people up with these threads. People like you, me, BroDeal, were viewed as total cynics, and people called BigBoat a "troll", and yet, the more evidence is dug up and and revealed, the more compelling our so called cynicism is.

I was one of the people calling BigBoat a troll. I regret it now, but I was frustrated with every post saying exactly the same thing and not providing proof or references. Each seemed to be written to induce a response, hence the troll remark. But I was never not a cynic and I think you'll agree most of my posts are quite realistic about the situation in the professional peloton. BigBoat's more recent posts have been more expansive and enlightening and he is obviously commenting from a position of authority if he is a high-level US coach, rather than trolling for a response. Again, I regret having said that about BigBoat and apologize to him/her for those remarks.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
elapid said:
Alan Davis spent a year telling anyone who would listen that he would offer his DNA to prove he was not involved. Like Gil, the UCI would not get off their fat lazy asses and take him up on his offer. He fought for a year and was cleared by the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority. He was one of the lucky ones. If he was truly guilty, then let him face the ASADA and be found guilty. If the evidence is not there or not being released by the Spanish authorities, then he and every other implicated rider has the right to ride, including Contador.

Ivan Basso said he'd give his DNA too......

I picked Davis primarily because on another forum, the Aussies swear on their mothers that Australian riders don't dope. Then today Cadel puts 30 seconds into all but two riders in a 12K ITT. Funny, one of the other two was Valverde....who the Spanish refuse to do anything to in terms of sanctions. You'll have to excuse me if I fail to see where swearing you'll give your DNA clears anyone.

I will freely admit that I troll at times however. Actually, calling someone a "troll" is trolling....dang.
 
Apr 12, 2009
1,087
2
0
Visit site
hfer07 said:
Katusha just put in practice what is a proven formula to correct a bad behavior, like in any judicial system around the world: you commit a crime, you pay for it.
I personally find that the only way to make a cyclist avoid the temptation of seeking doping is to penalize him where it hurts the most: FINANCIALLY -how?
The price for a doping violation is so high that is just unthinkable to even try- therefore the "necessity" & the demand for doping products, dirty doctors, doping rings & any kind of networks or programs will disappear by default. the same penalty most be apply to DS, managers, team owners & any other member of a team to get involved in pursuing any doping activities, or the encouragement of them.

I partly agree, the NFL implemented a new rule that if you don't show up for camp you get fined everyday you know what, they hardly hold out know. One thing that I don't like is that if you dope and it results in you being a really good cyclist, you get paid a boat load of cash, then if you get caught, you get a two year ban living off the money you made cheating, then you come back and sign a big contract aka basso, and it hardly hurts your pocket, I think katusha hurting their dopers financially is well it's better than nothing.
 
Mar 10, 2009
504
0
0
Visit site
Hotbrakes said:
Give them all lie-detector tests. "Come join our team". "Strap yourself to this machine and if you pass you get a big fat cheque and a new jersey".

Easy test to pass if you're a sociopath, or ethically bankrupt. I'd say there are several pros in that last category.
 
Mar 18, 2009
2,442
0
0
Visit site
Thoughtforfood said:
Ivan Basso said he'd give his DNA too......

I picked Davis primarily because on another forum, the Aussies swear on their mothers that Australian riders don't dope. Then today Cadel puts 30 seconds into all but two riders in a 12K ITT. Funny, one of the other two was Valverde....who the Spanish refuse to do anything to in terms of sanctions. You'll have to excuse me if I fail to see where swearing you'll give your DNA clears anyone.

Agreed. I think someone else has pointed out that those offering DNA to prove their innocence in Operation Puerto probably did not have stored bags of blood. I am Australian and definitely not so naive to believe that my Aussie sportsmen and women do not dope, the same as sports people of any nationality.

Valverde and Contador were third and second today, both implicated in Operation Puerto. However, I doubt Valverde is doping at the moment, so today's results don't make me believe that Cadel is doping. But remember the antidoping authorities in Spain largely had their hands tied because the Spanish judiciary who ruled that the evidence could not be used for suspensions because that would require a new law to be retrospectively applied, which very few countries would enforce.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
elapid said:
Agreed. I think someone else has pointed out that those offering DNA to prove their innocence in Operation Puerto probably did not have stored bags of blood. I am Australian and definitely not so naive to believe that my Aussie sportsmen and women do not dope, the same as sports people of any nationality.

Valverde and Contador were third and second today, both implicated in Operation Puerto. However, I doubt Valverde is doping at the moment, so today's results don't make me believe that Cadel is doping. But remember the antidoping authorities in Spain largely had their hands tied because the Spanish judiciary who ruled that the evidence could not be used for suspensions because that would require a new law to be retrospectively applied, which very few countries would enforce.

Unfortunately, I don't know that I am willing to say any rider isn't doping right now. I do believe that drugs like CERA and EPO are less prevalent, but packed cells and other drugs that are concealable are probably still in widespread use.

I also understand that in many ways, to do that job, they have to do something. What I saw in the Giro however were somewhat human performances compared to things like Ricco or LA riding up a climb like like they had a tow rope.

I don't think we are anywhere near "clean" though, and I am not sure we ever will be. It appears to me that the economic viability of the sport has again caused the UCI to look for ways to keep the sport clean in appearance, but doing little to actually clean up the sport.

As for Cadel, if he is, he is merely doing what one has to do to win a GT.